Dave Hopkin Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Posted by Ian Jones on 30/07/2015 13:53:28: I really feel for the man concerned, stupid ? Yes. Deserved what he got, as predictable as it was? No. I wish him the best recovery possible... and that any further media reporting is sensitive & realistic. Edited By Ian Jones on 30/07/2015 13:58:26 On the contrary I feel for the little lad who lost an eye due to the "pilots" utter stupidity and negligence If the accident had happened in an open area suitable for flying then I would feel a little more sympathy for him, but he chose to fly in an area unsuitable for flying and after all the publicity there has been over the last couple of years I dont see how anyone could claim ignorance of the legal restrictions for the use of UAV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kc Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 I wonder if the pilot was insured? Could be a massive claim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essjay Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Dave, I think you'll find Ian was commenting on the guy flying his helicopter indoors, NOT the guy flying the drone which blinded the poor little boy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Jones Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 Yes that's right Essjay. Though of course the little lad that lost his sight in one eye is very deserving of our kind thoughts and comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Bran Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 There is Indoors and there is Indoors. I have flown a 600 Indoors with perfect safety, as it was at BMFA approved take off distance from me with very strong catch netting between it and me which would not have allowed penetration even of a sheared blade. Outsider access was prohibited by locked doors. It was probably safer there than Outdoors! There is no finite "Indoor is unsafe at x size" rule. A 450 CAN be safe Indoors, sadly in this instance the guy wasn't thinking, and paid the price, end of....................... To those above comparing a 450 Heli to a "Flymo" in danger level.................REALLY??? You compare an exposed bladed by necessity lightweight constructed hobby item to a guarded and infinitely more heavily constructed and guarded tool which has passed all safety standards?? Yes I know, he could have put his head into the upturned Flymo's blade housing while it was running, he could have dropped pebbles in while it was rotating inverted. For heavens sake Guys, get real....................... If I was a Flymo Lawyer, I might be interested in your opinions of my product! Be honest with yourself............How many of you have NEVER used a knife cutting towards yourself? A chain saw without both feet planted firmly on the ground? Climbed with waist over the top of a ladder or steps? Gone under a vehicle with only a jack holding it up? It's only "news" because you are making it news, move along please, nothing to see here......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted hughes Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 It was an accident, this heli was being flown outdoors:**LINK** People get killed by cows taking their dog for a walk (8 in the last year), shall we ban cows or dogs? Edited By ted hughes on 01/12/2015 09:23:54 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bucksboy Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 I agree that a lot of the time it's the newspapers and their desire to sell papers that causes 'stories' to be changed to suit. I'm not talking about this poor little thing, that's truly appalling. At work I get to read a wide selection of newspapers and you can see the same story appearing over the whole week. Each paper reads the competitors and then re hashes the same story, I can read the same story over a whole week all with a different slant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Hopkin Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 Posted by Ian Jones on 01/12/2015 01:29:55: Yes that's right Essjay. Though of course the little lad that lost his sight in one eye is very deserving of our kind thoughts and comments. My apologies Ian I had the wrong end of the stick...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Jones Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 Posted by Dave Hopkin on 01/12/2015 10:39:00: Posted by Ian Jones on 01/12/2015 01:29:55: Yes that's right Essjay. Though of course the little lad that lost his sight in one eye is very deserving of our kind thoughts and comments. My apologies Ian I had the wrong end of the stick...... Thanks - No problem Dave . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cabbage Man Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 The press do use the term " toys" but if you read most blurb with models, it does specifically state " not a toy or suitable for under 14s" or something to that affect. Many reasons why and to do with product safety laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.